9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 780 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Operational Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - time limitation - HELD THAT - It is noted that the Operational Creditor supplied the goods to the Corporate Debtor and raised the various invoices during the period from 11.02.2020 to 03.03.2020 for the amount of ₹ 2,43,95,183.17/- and from 24.05.2021 to 07.11.2021 for the amount of ₹ 62,41,832/-. The aforesaid invoices do not fall within the amended provision of Section 10A of the IBC, 2016 as all the invoices were raised by the Operational Creditor prior to and after the effect of the aforesaid section. It is also noted that the Corporate Debtor has acknowledged the debt on 31.10.2021 and also proposed to pay the outstanding amount in a phased manner wherein the first installment of the commitment was to be paid by the Corporate Debtor on 09.11.2021 which was not paid by the Corporate Debtor. The Demand Notice was issued to the Corporate Debtor on 17.11.2021 which was delivered on 22.11.2021 but the Corporate Debtor neither paid the outstanding amount nor raised any dispute/replied to the said demand notice. The Corporate Debtor also admitted the default amount in its reply to the instant application dated 09.02.2022. It is also noted that the present application is well within the limitation and also meets the threshold limit as given in Section 4 of the IBC, 2016. The present application is otherwise complete and defect-free - Application allowed.
Issues:
Application under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by Operational Creditor against Corporate Debtor for default in payment of operational debt. Analysis: The application was filed by the Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the Corporate Debtor for defaulting on payment of operational debt amounting to ?3,06,37,015. The Corporate Debtor had acknowledged the debt but failed to honor the commitment to pay the outstanding amount, leading to the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The Operational Creditor had issued a notice demanding payment, which the Corporate Debtor did not respond to, further justifying the application for CIRP. The Tribunal noted that the invoices raised by the Operational Creditor were both before and after the amendment of Section 10A of the IBC, 2016, thereby not falling under the suspension period specified in the provision. The Corporate Debtor had admitted the default amount and proposed a phased payment plan, which was not adhered to. The application was found to be within the limitation and met the threshold limit as per Section 4 of the IBC, 2016, being complete and defect-free. Consequently, the Tribunal admitted the application, declared a moratorium as per Section 14(1) of the Code, and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to oversee the CIRP process. The moratorium was to be in effect until the completion of the CIRP or approval of a Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority. The IRP was directed to make a public announcement of the initiation of CIRP, manage the operations of the Corporate Debtor as a going concern, and ensure continuity of supply of goods/services during the moratorium period. Additionally, the Operational Creditor was directed to provide an advance of ?1,00,000 to the IRP for the smooth conduct of the CIRP. The Registry was instructed to communicate the order to all relevant parties and upload it on the website. The main application and an urgent listing request were both allowed, concluding the judgment on the 28th day of March, 2022.
|
